About this Show

The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur

News/Business. (2012) New. (CC) (Stereo)

NETWORK

DURATION
01:00:00

RATING
PG

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Virtual Ch. 107 (CURNT)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Fbi 5, Afghanistan 5, Cia 5, Broadwell 3, Us 3, Iraq 3, Paula Broadwell 3, United States 2, The Cia 2, Forsythe 2, Obama 2, Vo 2, Jon Forsythe 1, Willa 1, New York 1, Banor 1, Andrea Mitchell 1, Jill Kelly 1, Bradley Manning 1, Peter King 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  Current    The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur    News/Business.   
   (2012) New. (CC) (Stereo)  

    November 12, 2012
    4:00 - 5:00pm PST  

4:00pm
dish queen of all. you don't want to miss that. we'll see you then. bye. welcome to the young turks. general petraeus story has twists and turns you might not be familiar with. >> it's like peeling an onion every day another peel comes off. >> and whether the mistress should get the manning treatment. >> the cia annex had taken militia members prisoner and think it was an effort to try get them back. it is still being vetted. >> we'll talk about that in a bit. and we have another warning about climate change, but this from an unusual source.
4:01pm
>> by far that was one of the scariest waves i have seen captain -- come you through. >> now it's the soviet unions at the cia -- the softies at the cia warning us. we have the guys who wrote the report. tax the rich. tax the rich. the i have -- i have a great segment on that. great show ahead. it's go time. | [music] |. the general petraeus story has many implications. we will cover it from several angles including civil
4:02pm
liberties. we have to get you caught up on what has happened. good morning america today had a break down on how paula broadwell and general petraeus met. >> the two met while he was in had grad school in 2006 when she started working on a dissertation he agreed to help. that work turned into her book. in a january interview she discussed his wife. >> he is marriaed to holly petraeus a wonderful military spouse and has done so much for their children and children of fallen soldiers, i respect her. >> that's uncomfortable to watch. >> we get to an issue of how this was revealed. he is the director of the cia and he should know a thing or two about spying, but it turns out people at the fbi were spying on him. why? a family friend named jillicle
4:03pm
that led her to opening an inquiry after threatening e-mails. >> earlier this year, about the time that petraeus and broadwell were breaking off their affair, kelly began receiving anonymous mails she found so threatening she went to authorities. the fbi traced the e-mails to broadwell's computer and it made it clear, say officials that broadwell and the nation's cia director were having an affair. >> i think that raises an enormous issue no one else is talking about. aye get to that in a minute. first let's talk about the political implications. who found out when? what did they find out? and andrea mitchell will break down the time line for you guys. >> on november 2 the fbi concluded that there was no basis for criminal charges.
4:04pm
officials tell nbc news james clapper was told about the investigation and he informs the white house the next day. it was not until november 8 that the president was first notified and met with petraeus who offered to resign. the president accepted that resignation on friday when leaders of the house and senate intelligence committees learned about the affair. >> people are concerned when did the president know, why was he told so late? senator diane feinstein was very concerned. >> the decision was made somewhere not to brief us, which is atypical. generally what we call the four corners the chair and ranking both committees are briefed on operationally sensitive matters. this is an operationally sensitive matter.
4:05pm
we weren't briefed. of i don't know who made that decision. >> they will look into that and a person who was unhappy at the fbi that this was not followed up move you and went to the house majority leader but not on an intelligence committee and senator feinstein was upset about that as well. >> eric cantor the majority leader told about this at least 10 days before the president of the united states. how does that happen? and before you? >> that shouldn't happen. we need to get to the bottom of it. if it is, as you describe, then disciplinary actions in order. >> there are serious political issues here. i want to go something far more important the civil liberties angle. remember how this started. as we told you it started with jill kelly a family friend and the new york time has a -- had
4:06pm
a really interesting information they buried the lead on. quote: whoa. this started because somebody knew somebody at the fbi and thought i'm being accused of being flirtatious and it's not true, can you investigate into this person's's personal life and my personal life? wait a minute, did you not get a warrant on this? did gu to a judge and said my buddy is concerned about an e-mail she got accusing her on being overly flirtatious. they didn't know it was going to be paula broadwell and starting an investigation based on almost nothing.
4:07pm
did you got a warrant or more disturbing did you not get a warrant? peter king makes one of the few good points he has ever made in his entire life. >> i was thinking they would have to get a court order. i would like to know what got that court order. >> id like to know that too? i got an inappropriate ea mail and a guy at the fbi that knows me, track that person down. loot -- let's go into their private e-mails and go into every nook and cranny and it's the head of the cia. the -- this is crazy. we are spying on the head of the cia and nobody evens whether we have awe a warrant for it or not. i think it's a huge problem. finally, another problem here, the leaking of possibly classified. untillation. classified information.
4:08pm
y she was going around bragging about stuff she knew about libya and the benghazi attacks nobody else knew. listen to this speech she gave. >> i don't know if a lot of you heard this, the cia annex had taken a couple of libyan militia members pressener and think this of an effort to get the prisoners back. that's still being vetted. >> whoa, whoa, what are you doing? nobody knows that information. you can't brag about it. i don't know if you know this, possibly classified information and you i will just reveal this willy-nilly because i am sleeping with the head of the cia. they broke off that affair four months ago and didn't start it in when he was in the military, because heed be sanctioned seriously because it's against the the rules the conveniently his affair started two months after he left the military. if you are leaking information i
4:09pm
want a bradley manning type of investigation. we detained him and stripped him nakedda at night in case he was a dairchler and put hip in isolation and before he was charged with anything. for 19 months we did this to him. are we going to do the same thing to paula broadwell without knowing if she will be charged with anything? >> if the government is on your side, maybe not. if you are bradley manning, you get that kind of treatment. the i -- hypocrisy is outrageous. we have the professor of history at the university of michigan. he is a middle east expert and expert on afghanistan and general petraeus to some degree. first, i want to ask you about the general. i don't care about the affair other than the implications with the civil liberties.
4:10pm
he is built up as a legend. he is in terps of his accomplishments for what he is known for, the surge in iraq? >> i am hoping the one good thing that might come out of this very unfortunate train of events is we start to re-think the right wing narrative of the iraq and afghanistan wars, which is some how the united states has still learned to do counter insurgency and came out of it all right. it's not true. the united states lost the iraq war. very badly. and it lost the afghanistan war. it was not the reason we got awe a soft landing in iraq. it was a bad idea to attempt it in afghanistan and a failure and petraeus, you know, apart from
4:11pm
his own qualities of leadership and intelligence was you a poster -- was a poster boy for a false narrative of the wars. >> that goes to the real issue of morality here. if you do this surge in afghanistan and it doesn't work and hundreds of our guys get killed, let alone the thousands of afghans that are killed we don't have a moral willa problem with -- moral problem with that, but if you had an affair, isn't there something off with our politics and the way the media covers it? >> it is absolutely scandalous, you know. we no longer with current tv and some other exceptions we don't really have news any more. we have into -- into tainment. and doing a story about the affair is easy. going off and looking at how our
4:12pm
troops are getting the shaft because of a bad command decision, that's hard. and very few people are doing that. >> one last thing about that, in iraq you wrote about how the surge is the success of you a product of ethnic cleansing. this is not talked about in the light of general petraeus. it's a comical question, but no one is asking because it's comical in the wrong direction right, what's worse him encouraging ethnic cleansing by the shiites in iraq ora a stupid affair. >> i'm not accusing him of encouraging ethnic cleansing, it just worked out that way. late 2006 the u.s. enter prize in iraq collapsed and it was over with. bush and the people around him werey -- were determined not to
4:13pm
go down in flames and petraeus went to the prime minister and said we have to take the weapons away from the militia and said it's not the shiites that are the problem it's the sunnis. as soon as he started disarming them the shiite militia came in and killed them and chased them away. let's call it troop escalation rather thanna a surge, that was a propaganda term. one of the things that was happening is the mixed neighborhoods in baghdad were becoming will solidly shiite and that tosm -- tamped down the violence because they were going
4:14pm
in and when they weren't mixed any more the killing stopped. >> hundreds of thousands of iraqis dead not all because of the general, but a surge he got credit for. that's seen as a positive in his faire favor. the that's -- in his favor. he sleeps with the wrong person and there is a federal case. there is something wrong with this country and our media coverage. thank you for shedding light on this. >> thank you. >> when we come back, also something seriously wrong in our media coverage of the grand bargain that should be called the grand larceny. it is a robbery of the highest order. people like bill crystal saying we might raise revenue. there is a catch in there and next i'll tell you that. >> the republican party is going to fallout with the millionaires -- >> don't trust them, i'll tell
4:15pm
you why. and see if you can getsz guess the elbow of the day. one of us. >> thats why current is stepping up. >> ... by feeding the needy. >>... feeding the needy. >>... feeding the needy. >>... feeding the needy. >>... feeding the needy. >> for an entire week we'll explore hunger, malnutrition even obesity. >> ... and offer solutions. >> so join us here at current tv where together, we'll feed the needy. >> brought to you by basf the chemical company.
4:16pm
4:17pm
>> all right, so you have better been hearing about the fiscal cliff,. look what they are saying on the media.
4:18pm
>> 51 day away from the fiscal cliff. >> president obama will make a decision on the fiscal cliff. >> looming financial cries. >> the looming fiscal cliff. >> the fiskical cliff approaching. >> he is not bending much in his fiscal cliff statement. >> how bad things will go if we go off the fesical cliff. >> could go off the fiscal cliff the first of jon. >> look out -- the first of january. >> oh, no, it's a fiscal cliff. according to sequestration we would have a lot of spending cuts. 1.2 trillion in spending cuts if we go over the so-called fiscal cliff. we need to do a grand bargain. how many spending cuts? according to the president'sy calculations before the republicans get to it, 3 trillion. what the hell? if you are worrying about the spending cuts it's three times in the grand bargain than in the
4:19pm
solution. non-sense this is cost shufting. hay don't give a damn, they want to cut spending just not from defense thatted take from defense contractors who pay the a lot to politicians. these are some of the proposals. so, how about taxes? bill crystal said it's okay, republicans are willing to work on taxes. >> you know what, it don't kill the country if we raise taxes on millionaires. i don't understand why republicans don't take obama's office. >> the grand bargain is great for rich people, take it
4:20pm
already. president obama seems to have said something good at the end of last weeky we will raise taxes but listen and see if he will raise tax rates or revenue. i'll tell you the difference in a empty. >> if wa are serious about reducing the deficit we have to combine spending cuts with revenue and that means asking the wealthiest to pay a little more in taxes. i was encourageed to hear spook are banor that it has to be part of the erk qaigzia he says tax revenue and not increased tax rates. the chief economist says: and he continues to explain his opposition is quite emboldened by this. they might do the romney plan. you remember what he said.
4:21pm
here is what he used to say. >> there are alternatives to accomplish the objective i have, which is to bring down rates and broaden the base, simplify the code and create incentives for growth. >> in order tax reform means we'll bring in extra rev mew and closing loopholes, but we are not going to have the rates go up. if that's the case, that is a disaster of epic proportions and the president is seemingly setting that up and the republicans can't wait to pounce on that. finally, well, another -- tax cuts, under this grand bargain at least we get a trillion worth of tax increases. that's great, isn't it? here is what happens if we do nothing and the bush tax cuts expire. we get 950 billion. what the hell do we need the grand bargain for? if we don't do anything we get the trillion dollars in extra
4:22pm
revenue any way and we don't have to give up 3 trillion in spending cuts. you only do that if you want the spending cuts and want to gut those programs. that's what president obama wants to do. can't wait to work with the republicans to do that. don't just take my word for it, let's bring in professor bill black. so, first of all talk to me about the grand bargain and the spending cuts. it doesn't seem to make sense. if they are concerned about spending cuts shouldn't they be 10 times more concerned about the grand bargainaain? >> it's worse than you let on. obamaa correctly said at the beginning of his speech the priority has to be jobs, jobs, jobs. and then he announced an you austerity plan and you are right, his plan is even imposes nastier ahsterrity -- austerity
4:23pm
than the fiscal cliff that will throw millions out of work and cause the nation to go back into recession and increase the budget deficit instead of decreasing it and will cut the benefits like the food stamps so that when people are unemployed they will be reduceed to abject poverty. it is a catastrophic disaster and that's before you get to the great betrayal, which is beginning to gut the safety net where wall street's long-term goal is and always has been since the creation of social security the privatization of social security so that they can get the management fees for managing trillions of dollars of investments whiched produce hundreds of billions of dollars in additional revenues to wall street. >> a lot of people don't believe that. they say the democrats wouldn't go along if what you say is
4:24pm
true. but they are going along. does that mean the democrats also want to do those spending cuts and also want to do this grand larceny? >> the democrats aren't focused on it. here is how bad the lagic s. primary logic, fiscal cliff bad because it imposes austerity and they quote the congressional budget office, cbookkeeper o says it will force the nation back into recession and cause enemployment to rise by millions and might increase the budget deficit, right? had we don't want -- we don't want awe storyity. that is proposition one. proposition two therefore we should have a plan with twice as bad austerity. >> that makes no sentence washington will do. everybody should fight back whether the republicans or democrats in this case. thank you for joining us on the young turks.
4:25pm
we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> now when we come back, the cia is warning us about climate change and the damage it can do to our national security. >> flood protections that were once unnecessary are being reconsidered. >> conducting military operations anywhere in the world if the storms are of higher intensity, that's a big deal. >> and more proof the only thing republicans actually care about is more tax cuts for the rich. >> the rich here haven't just used their money to buy fancy cars and private jets and mansion, they have used it to rig the game in their favor. (vo) at the only online forum with a direct line to cenk uygur. >>if you had to vote for a republican, which one would it be? (vo) join the debate now.
4:26pm
[ forsythe ] we don't just come up here for the view up in alaska. it's the cleanest, clearest water. we find the best sweetest crab for red lobster that we can find.
4:27pm
[ male announcer ] hurry in to red lobster's crabfest! the only time of year you can savor 5 succulent crab entrees all under 20 dollars. like a half-pound of tender snow crab paired with savory grilled shrimp, just 12.99. or our hearty crab and roasted garlic seafood bake. [ forsythe ] if i wouldn't put it on my table at home, i wouldn't bring it in. my name's jon forsythe and i sea food differently. ñ
4:28pm
4:29pm
4:30pm
4:31pm
4:32pm
4:33pm
4:34pm
4:35pm
4:36pm
4:37pm
4:38pm
4:39pm
4:40pm
4:41pm
4:42pm
4:43pm
4:44pm
4:45pm
4:46pm
4:47pm
4:48pm
4:49pm
4:50pm
4:51pm
4:52pm
4:53pm
4:54pm
4:55pm
4:56pm
4:57pm
4:58pm
4:59pm